Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

ESPN: Andrew Luck retiring

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Basketball Fan
    replied
    Originally posted by Cubs231721 View Post

    I actually think Luck laid out a very clear reason why he did it. It's just some do not believe him and believe there was an ulterior motive, which is their right. He repeated multiple times in the press conference that when he played the season in 2016 while he was hurt, he told himself he would never do that again. Now he was hurt again, it wasn't getting better, and the proposed plan was for him to play through the pain again. He didn't want to do it, so he left.
    Except you know he played in the Pro Bowl just a few months ago something most injured players avoid btw. He also participated in the dog/pony show of participating in drills and throwing a football etc. from that to retirement with no real explanation in between is rather drastic and if it were anyone else there would be a lot more digging into this story... there won't be though. We're always going to wonder if there's a story we never knew about going on this whole time that led to his retirement. Was he hurt worse than what the team let on? How did he get hurt? Was he hurt? Did he consider retirement in 2017?

    I don't think fans asking these questions are out of bounds here they're rather legit and within reason considering its the fans who pay for this product in the first place.

    Luck can leave all he wants he should've just done it months earlier (or years earlier if he considered it before this past season) instead of wasting our time like this....

    Leave a comment:


  • Cubs231721
    replied
    Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post

    Well if he told anyone on the team before he had the PC he was a moron to think it would be kept a secret...... that being said if he wanted to tell us about why he did it etc he could've done it he chose not to.
    I actually think Luck laid out a very clear reason why he did it. It's just some do not believe him and believe there was an ulterior motive, which is their right. He repeated multiple times in the press conference that when he played the season in 2016 while he was hurt, he told himself he would never do that again. Now he was hurt again, it wasn't getting better, and the proposed plan was for him to play through the pain again. He didn't want to do it, so he left.

    Leave a comment:


  • Basketball Fan
    replied
    Originally posted by PacerDude View Post
    I would think that his news conference would have been a little different if he did it on his own terms and wasn't forced to do it because of someone running their mouth.

    He might have gone into a little more detail - he might have given a little more insight to the whole decision process.

    Or maybe not. But, it sux that he was forced to do it when and how he had to. Would still like to know who the leak came from, what their motivation was and what's their standing with the team today . . .. . . .
    Well if he told anyone on the team before he had the PC he was a moron to think it would be kept a secret...... that being said if he wanted to tell us about why he did it etc he could've done it he chose not to.

    Leave a comment:


  • PacerDude
    replied
    I would think that his news conference would have been a little different if he did it on his own terms and wasn't forced to do it because of someone running their mouth.

    He might have gone into a little more detail - he might have given a little more insight to the whole decision process.

    Or maybe not. But, it sux that he was forced to do it when and how he had to. Would still like to know who the leak came from, what their motivation was and what's their standing with the team today . . .. . . .

    Leave a comment:


  • Basketball Fan
    replied
    Which is why its never going to happen... unlike Manning post-retirement I don't expect any of us to hear from Andrew Luck again from a football standpoint.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bball
    replied
    I wonder if Andrew Luck was to sit down, say some truthfully prepared words and take questions, how the narrative would change?

    No, I don't think we've heard the truth. I think we need to rewind to at least the shoulder surgery and a better understanding of how that came to be. Then a discussion on where his mind was at during rehab. Did retirement cross his mind then because he was having trouble making it back, or was he having trouble making it back because he was thinking retirement then and unable to fully commit to rehab?

    Was last season some type of deal between Luck and the team to give it one more go and he could keep his bonus money in full, was it just Luck wanting to prove to himself he COULD come back, or something else?

    What did he tell the Colts and when did he tell them? Did they keep Brissett after Luck's apparent return because they knew there were undercurrents Luck was considering retirement? How long have the Colts known retirement was a front burner issue for them and Luck?

    How did he get injured this spring... or was he even injured at all? Was this just to buy him time to make a decision? We're probably not going to get any truth about whether it was to not dampen ticket sales. Although that said, truth be known, pushing Luck to wait until the last minute to make the decision final would also afford the Colts the chance that Luck changes his mind and plays after all. So ticket sales doesn't have to be the only motivation for the Colts. IOW, Luck could still tell us he knew in Feb, March, April he wasn't returning (or even knew heading into last season it was really his 'last' season) and what/when he told the Colts that and both parties could tell us the cover story was to give Luck time to change his mind and see what he was thinking closer to the start of the season. Without the cover story of an injury, it would've been a huge distraction to hear Luck was considering retirement all or most of the off season.
    But eventually the injury excuse became a distraction too. Was it minor or was it not? Could he play through it? Would he play through it? Why was a minor calf injury taking so long? Wait, now it's the ankle... Wait, now he's on the sidelines looking fine... ??? Was it ever real in the first place?

    I think this would be more palatable if he just admitted this was a mental issue. A mental block. Even that he just decided he didn't need football any longer. Not that he'd been beaten up too much to continue playing the game he loved. And to know this decision went further back than a couple of weeks before the start of the regular season would help as well.

    I'm not going to be convinced there even was an injury this spring unless he comes way more clean about it with something appearing to be truthful and helping to explain all the mysteries around it. Especially now that we have hindsight to see that it's even more strange and surreal than it all appeared as it was happening.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sollozzo
    replied
    Brees and Big Ben really emphasize my point that the best are just wired differently. Both of these guys are old champions who really don’t have anything left to prove. But they have a fundamental desire to compete and win until the bitter end. They will give it their all to recover from their injuries so they can be back on the field.

    Thats what fans root for. People like to see greatness and a desire to be the best. People generally don’t root for early retirements due to mysterious injuries that the public is kept in the dark over.

    Brees and Big Ben clearly have a mindset that Luck lacked. That’s why they are champions who will be in Canton someday.

    Its frustrating - almost every halfway decent QB in history wants to compete and compete and compete until they basically have no skill set left. We just had the misfortune of drafting the one guy who was willing to walk away from it all.

    Leave a comment:


  • Basketball Fan
    replied
    Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post

    You have to do the whole story I think: talk about the Manning Colts starting 14-0 in 2009 and making the Super Bowl. That was a crushing loss, but everyone thought at the time that we still had several years left of a Manning window. But he only played QB one more year for the Colts after that. His Colts career came to such A sudden end. He was only 34 in the last season he suited up in Indy.

    Then talk about the departure, drafting Luck, and Manning’s Bronco success.

    Then talk about Luck’s successes in Indy - the climax being the 2018 season which was the best of his career. Looked like his prime was just starting. Emphasize that Luck was so good that despite Manning’s Denver successes, most Colts fans weren’t too upset about the whole thing after 2018 because it looked like Luck was on the cusp of his prime. Then boom, retirement right before 2019 starts with the specifics being a total mystery. The public never got a single bit of substantive information.

    Hopefullt the documentary can also mention how Frank Reich kept the Colts moving forward and winning. I think there’s a good chance that happens. The guy can flat out coach.

    That would be great material, though I’m not sure how eager Manning would be to participate in it. He loves to talk about his glory years with the Colts, but is very tight lipped about the departure (an obvious sore spot). And there’s no way in hell I see Luck participating unless the documentary is done in like 25 years. I don’t think we’ll hear much at all from Luck. He’ll probably be backpacking in Europe somewhere.

    There are two stories in one with this I don't think Manning would directly participate in this one it could be like Leaf's E 60 episode where it was about him and Manning was featured but he was never interviewed for it. That could be Luck's story.

    I also don't think Luck would participate either we barely heard from him since he retired and even that was a mystery how it all transpired... its a 30 for 30 that may never really be told even though it should.

    Leave a comment:


  • imawhat
    replied
    He's been biking in Amsterdam, if one is to be believed.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sollozzo
    replied
    Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post

    I guess the only question is is the story going to be about Luck in general or will it begin with the Manning to Luck transition with the ending being Luck's retirement nearly 3 years after Manning walked away an SB champion somewhere else? There could be a 2 for 1 special here.
    You have to do the whole story I think: talk about the Manning Colts starting 14-0 in 2009 and making the Super Bowl. That was a crushing loss, but everyone thought at the time that we still had several years left of a Manning window. But he only played QB one more year for the Colts after that. His Colts career came to such A sudden end. He was only 34 in the last season he suited up in Indy.

    Then talk about the departure, drafting Luck, and Manning’s Bronco success.

    After that, talk about Luck’s successes in Indy - the climax being the 2018 season which was the best of his career. Looked like his prime was just starting. Emphasize that Luck was so good that despite Manning’s Denver successes, most Colts fans weren’t too upset about the whole thing after 2018 because it looked like Luck was on the cusp of his prime. Then boom, retirement right before 2019 starts with the specifics being a total mystery. The public never got a single bit of substantive information.

    Hopefullt the documentary can also mention how Frank Reich kept the Colts moving forward and winning. I think there’s a good chance that happens. The guy can flat out coach.

    That would be great material, though I’m not sure how eager Manning would be to participate in it. He loves to talk about his glory years with the Colts, but is very tight lipped about the departure (an obvious sore spot). And there’s no way in hell I see Luck participating unless the documentary is done in like 25 years. I don’t think we’ll hear much at all from Luck. He’ll probably be backpacking in Europe somewhere.
    Last edited by Sollozzo; 09-20-2019, 08:51 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bball
    replied
    Originally posted by Basketball Fan View Post

    I guess the only question is is the story going to be about Luck in general or will it begin with the Manning to Luck transition with the ending being Luck's retirement nearly 3 years after Manning walked away an SB champion somewhere else? There could be a 2 for 1 special here.
    If they do the Manning one with that tongue in cheek, sarcastic humor tone, then they'll mention the hype for Luck, the concerns for Manning, and ultimately the Colts' decision to move on. Then they'll move on to following Manning at Denver. More of the rehab and comeback struggles. The work to acclimate the Bronco offense to fit around him. All culminating with his final SB win and retirement as SB champ.

    The credits will start to roll but abruptly stop. Almost as a postscript, and with that sarcastic voiceover tone "Oh, you're probably wondering about Andrew Luck... Well, 32 games after Manning's crowning achievement of winning SB 50, Andrew Luck announced his retirement from football on the eve of the 2019-2020 season. He was mentally worn out...."
    Continue rolling credits...
    Last edited by Bball; 09-19-2019, 11:55 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Basketball Fan
    replied
    Originally posted by Bball View Post
    One thing is for sure, a 30 for 30 episode has to be brewing for this.
    I guess the only question is is the story going to be about Luck in general or will it begin with the Manning to Luck transition with the ending being Luck's retirement nearly 3 years after Manning walked away an SB champion somewhere else? There could be a 2 for 1 special here.

    Leave a comment:


  • Basketball Fan
    replied
    Originally posted by PacerDude View Post

    Right. He just walked out on his team in the middle of a game.
    He also got deservedly criticized for doing it at the worst time.....

    Leave a comment:


  • PacerDude
    replied
    Originally posted by Bball View Post
    At least Vontae didn't go out with a made up injury and months of lying and speculation by fans, media, the team, and Luck himself.
    Right. He just walked out on his team in the middle of a game.

    Leave a comment:


  • BlueNGold
    replied
    Originally posted by Bball View Post
    It was Andrew Luck's right to quit on his team and fans.

    I think that is about as simple as it can be put. It's his life and his decision, and the decision he made was to quit on the team and fans.
    It was his right. It may have been the right thing for him to retire. I don't blame Luck especially since I don't know. But if he's just giving up because he's been paid enough I think he's short-changing fans.

    The reason these guys receive so much money is because of the fans. Fans, at least I would hope most of them, are interested because they want to see their favorite players and teams succeeed. If players routinely screwed the fans out of the product (like the NBA has been doing), fans would rightly feel they have been cheated and really should take their interest and money elsewhere. But of course, it's their choice None of this is saying that fans will not take a beating and keep asking for it.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X